Fall of the Catholic Church

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119150792#Comment_119150792

Wouldn’t matter if they were idle for 100% of the week, properties which have lain idle for decades are still the property of their owners, and those owners have to be compensated accordingly if the State wishes to take ownership of the property or the land on which it sits. It’s possible the State might be able to purchase the land for half nothing, but I doubt it. Possible though, that seems to be the thing you’re hanging your hat on.

Hotblack Desiato

Underused urban property needs to be taxed out of existence, just like they do in the States. Property taxes there are high and make sittling on idle property uneconomic. Don't pay your property taxes, your property gets seized and sold to someone who will do something useful with it. There's no reason why church property shouldn't be taxed the same as any other, either.

As for the aforementioned NIMBYs who object to everything, they need to get the fúck over themselves tbh. "I was here first" is not a viable method of urban planning.

nozzferrahhtoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119121361#Comment_119121361

I can certainly emotionally relate to the concept of forming beliefs based on "personal experience". We all do it. It is very human. But personal experience is very limited. And in many things we already are starting to learn that personal and eye witness testimony is the worst kind of evidence there is. While meanwhile in areas like epidemiology we have long worked on ways to eliminate personal opinion and testimony from both the doctors and the test patients.

In short personal experience pretty much sucks. Worse there is a whole world of seeming nonsense validated by personal experience. Personal experience tells one person that aliens exist and abduct citizens in order to explore their anus.... but tells another person homeopathy is actually efficacious medicine.... and tells another person that horoscopes are valid and accurate.... and so on.

Meanwhile the human brain appears to have been chiseled by evolution to validate personal experience in a way that as soon as we have some notion that validates some personal experience.... like "I experienced A B and C and I think a god explains this".... we then implement things like confirmation bias in order to spend sometimes an entire life time validating that conclusion.

So while I can have empathy for you being led to conclusions through personal experience, you should return that empathy and realise just what that sounds like to someone OUTSIDE that experience.

As for your closing shot at the end of your post..... there are three errors in it that are worth correction.

The first is that many of us ARE affected, sometimes deeply, by the god hypothesis and god belief. Because in many, sometimes even every, realm of discourse or activity that is important to us this belief shows up and gets shoved in our face. Not by YOU personally of course, but by many. In our realms of science, education, sexuality, gender, politics, rights, morality, ethics, philosophy and much more..... the parties of god do show up and push their concepts and agenda.

The second is your idea that I am putting all that much "effort" into critique and denigration. I average less than a post a week on the topic on this forum for example. And due to the high speed at which I type even a post of this length took me mere moments. This is hardly any effort at all really. However even if I was investing high amounts of effort in it.... so what? It is a worthy pursuit, especially in a world punctuated by many people who invest no effort in anything meaningful at all.... or invest it in pursuits like binge watching stultifying drama series on their streaming channel of choice. So relatively speaking what of it? My investment of effort is just as valid as anyone else's.

Third and finally.... it's hardly like I am chasing believers around to denigrate their belief's at them. This is a discussion and debate forum. You chose to come post here, I chose to come post here, and we are having a conversation. This is a GOOD thing. And either one of us can leave at any time. The moment you stop replying to me I will more than likely stop replying to you. It does seem a bit weird to come into a thread.... talk with me.... and then make a closing cheap shot basically questioning why I am talking to you about it :) That seems as weird to me as going into a bar, buying someone a drink, and then asking them why they are sitting there drinking alcohol.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119124922#Comment_119124922

I am not sure I can be accused of dishonesty for things I never actually said however? But since this thread has gone on for quite a few days now I have to say I am not entirely sure to which phrase exactly you are saying is dishonest? Was it something specifically from me? Or something from this generic "secularists" you appear above to want to paint all with the same brush? A line like "dishonesty as usual from secularists" is just the empty posturing of tribalism we see all too often these days, often imported from the US, where its all "oh those dishonest republicans/democrats lying again". Maybe speak to the individual rather than pretending entire groups are somehow homogenous automatons identically made off an assembly line? Secularism is quite a disparate group of people. And there are deeply secular theists for example just as much as their are deeply secular atheists. Secularism transcends and permeates many groups of thought.

Your closing remark of the stage "only intervened" though is still making my second point for me. Intervention clearly exists. We can mediate how when and why such intervention can and should come into play. But the fact intervention can happen, and should happen, and does happen.... seems not to be in question in any coherent way. Which is all my point was to the user who was questioning why anyone wants to stick a nose into how any parents are raising "their" children. The answer simply is that there ARE situations where we can, and SHOULD, do so. And the user I was replying to seemed like he might benefit from being reminded of that.

downtheroad

There was a discussion on Newstalk just now about religion in school, and the host just said it is convenient for him to have schools do the sacraments so he doesn't have to make the effort for his kids.

Genuinely asking catholics here, why do you want these half bothered, tick the box, people making a minimal token effort in engaging with your faith, and not treating it with the respect that they should (if they were to take it seriously)?

nozzferrahhtoo

^ As a non believer and definite non catholic I have always found it weird how little people seem to engage with their faith of choice.

Christians generally.... Most of them I have met have not even SEEN a Bible. Let alone actually read it. In fact I have met theists who, when I had a Bible to show them, were shocked at how big it was and how much was in it. Mainly because school and church fed them the same cherry picked passages over and over again.... they did not realise how much more there was to it. I can not pretend to know how the mind of theists works, but knowing how my mind works... if I genuinely believed there was a creator of the universe who controlled the well being of my eternal soul..... the LEAST I would/could do would be to read the main (only?) book that claims to represent any kind of communication with it, it's wishes and it's agendas.

Catholics specifically.... I have noticed over the years how little they know about their own faith. We seem to have this "catholic education" system with what they call an "integrated" curriculum. But almost no Catholics appear to learn anything about what it is they are meant to believe. This was never so stark to me as when I was obtaining and experimenting on their consecrated wafer bread. While talking to Catholics about this bread they were split generally into three main camps of belief. They either thought the ceremony LITERALLY changed the cracker into Jesus.... or SPIRITUALLY changed it into Jesus.... or in fact the ceremony was ENTIRELY symbolic and the cracker changed in no way whatsoever on any level. Regardless of their belief they were unsure what the church claims/believes and just generally hoped their own personal belief was mostly congruent with the faith.

It does make you wonder, especially after the Bishops conference survey which showed how many Catholics do not even believe in a virgin birth, resurrection, afterlife, heaven or even... comically... a god..... how many theists are actually believers. And how many of them "believe in belief" as Daniel Dennett used to call it.... in that they believe in claiming belief, aligning with it, posturing it... but not actually HAVING any of it.

Igotadose

^as an atheist I'm always amused when I quote scripture at the devout and get a blank stare as they've never heard it. Not even particularly obscure nasty parts like the donkey testicle bit.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

There are some interesting and philosophical bits in the bible, let's be honest - but that doesn't make you a Catholic. Or even a theist for that matter. Depends on how you interpret it (or blindly accept someone else's interpretation).

Hotblack Desiato

I see the "damn secularists" trope has reared its ugly head again.

The catholic church and its apologists continually claim that these two things are true:

• Secularism is equivalent to irreligion (or even antitheism)
• Materialism is equivalent to greed.

Neither of these things is even remotely true.

You'd think their clergy who are supposed to have spent years studying theology and philosophy would know these things? It seems there's a great deal of "mental reservation" i.e. lying for Jesus going on. (That's before we go anywhere near any of the claims of the faith itself...)

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119152813#Comment_119152813

There might even perhaps be the odd useful little nugget of information in the book Dianetics along with the great deal of bullshíte. It doesn't make Scientology a sensible belief system for one to base one's life upon...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119153321#Comment_119153321

Dainetics should in no way be compared to the Bible. You'd be more accurate comparing it to something like Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter.

In any case, basing your belief system on ANY one book is a bit supid.

Leroy42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119153765#Comment_119153765

Why? Age seems to be the main difference in giving one more credit than any other

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119153765#Comment_119153765

The only difference between the Bible and Dianetics and the other two is that the other two don't claim to not be fiction

Quitelife

Do ye just hate catholics here or do ye hate protestants, muslims, jews as well???

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119152144#Comment_119152144

Genuinely asking is there grading system for catholic "respect" or "fervour" that you are using as a reference. Bit like a "Class 2 relic" etc.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119154433#Comment_119154433

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119154865#Comment_119154865

I'd argue that it's the followers more so than the actually writers of the books that claim it's real. The gospels - for the most part - were historical commentaries. And just to be clear - that does NOT mean that they are therefore 100% accurate! - commentaries by definition are not meant to be documented facts.

I'm going to be honest at this point and say I'm never read any Dianetics books, so can't comment.

As for the age-based analysis - I could have picked any number of science fiction (or philosophical) works and made the same point.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119154898#Comment_119154898

Any of them that try and tell me that they are more morally conscsious or a better person than me simply because of their faith and none of them that don't.

downtheroad

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119154979#Comment_119154979

I would say someone is actively catholic or they're not. Those that show their face for the big5 (baptism, communion, confirmation, wedding, funeral) are in the latter category in my view, box ticking exercise. Showing up to midnight mass at christmas on the way home for the pub doesn't bump you into the catholic category either.

I've used the analogy before , but it genuinely is the equivalent of skipping training all year only to show up when the team gets to the final. It shows complete disrespect to the organisation and active catholics, but the disrespect is ignored by both as they are delighted to see bums on seats and keep up the pretence that the catholic church is a relevant organisation in Ireland in 2022.

If the church had any self respect and followed its own beliefs and guidelines (for example, not allowing children born out of wedlock to be baptised) there would be a massive fall off in numbers but the net result would be a membership of people who actually want to be there.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151117#Comment_119151117

There’s talks of introducing a vacant properties tax in the next budget alright, which, if it’s ‘enforced’ in the same way as the already existing Derelict Sites Act, will mean that property owners will not be at all affected, as any levies won’t be enforced -

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/environment/buildings_and_structures/derelict_sites.html

That’s notwithstanding the fact that the urban areas with the most derelict or vacant properties aren’t in Dublin, they’re outside of Dublin, and many are already owned by local authorities which have allowed the properties to become derelict, even though they receive a housing allocation in the budget every year, that they appear to be reluctant to spend -

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/special-report-4000-properties-owned-by-councils-empty-in-a-housing-crisis-41244351.html

There IS a good reason why Church properties aren’t taxed in the same way, primarily because it’s prohibited by the Constitution, and also because the Church, as an organisation, has tax exempt status as a charity, regulated by the Charities Act -

3.— (1) For the purposes of this Act each of the following shall, subject to subsection (2), be a charitable purpose: 

(a) the prevention or relief of poverty or economic hardship; 

(b) the advancement of education; 

(c) the advancement of religion; 

(d) any other purpose that is of benefit to the community.

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2009/act/6/section/3/enacted/en/html#sec3

It’s not NIMBYism to object to what is just terrible planning. It’s not based upon the idea that they were there first, it’s based upon the idea that the tower blocks are just a terrible idea for a whole host of legitimate reasons. The Irish Government got rid of tenements decades ago, there’s no good reason they should be reintroduced in Irish society.

I wouldn’t be suggesting anyone get over themselves either, because everyone has the right to have standards. It’s why for example when Educate Together were offered this dilapidated effort by way of divestment, they rightfully objected, in spite of being accused of being an “elitist” organisation -

https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0827/723822-schools/

https://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0908/815049-educate-together/

https://www.mayonews.ie/news/28374-planning-block-on-castlebar-school

Now that’s a legitimate example of a NIMBY who should find something better to do with his time.

Shoog

"Do ye just hate catholics here or do ye hate protestants, muslims, jews as well???"

The religiously inclined would cover it ....

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119155474#Comment_119155474

Though oddly if the best footballer skipped training they still be played and the dedication left on the bench. So perhaps not the best analogy.

So by your rating if someone managed the odd regular mass they become "actively" Catholic. I was expecting more detail like getting a few yellow cards from the pulpit before getting the red or black card. Disappointing tbh.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119154898#Comment_119154898

You might explain how anyone questioning a belief system, or expressing the desire to not have a state funded school force that belief system on their kids, equates to "hatred" of adherents of any religion? That's assuming you have any intention of engaging in discussion here and not running away like a coward after launching your "zinger".

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119155163#Comment_119155163

We live in a culture predisposed to regarding the gospels as factually true no matter what, "gospel truth" etc, but there is little or no evidence from actual historians (and the Greeks and the Romans were big into recording history) that this Jesus fella ever existed at all never mind had magical powers. I regard them as retconned fan-fiction.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119155474#Comment_119155474

If these people actually believed that their actions during their life on this earth could have an effect on something which happens to them after their death, not just for a while but "for ever", you'd be damn sure they'd live their lives very differently.

I don't like the types who spend their whole time preaching in public, annoying/pushing Jesus on people, but they do at least act in accordance with what they profess to believe in. If you believe in an eternal life, that's kinda important!

The "meh" types who nonetheless support the imposition of a religion on others in schools and hospitals while not living by that religion themselves are beneath contempt. The majority of catholic box-tickers on this island. The word hypocrite does not even begin to describe them.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119155589#Comment_119155589

A strong manager would tell them to get the F out because it not only destroys their authority it makes fools out of everyone else.

But a weak manager would accept them... that's the position the RCC is in now. Can't afford to alienate anybody. Will accept the kids of the "hoors" and "quares" * for sacraments as long as they pay up. Go through the motions, they don't mind, tip the priest in cash, conform on the big day to the social norm they created, it's all continuing their power over primary schools where state employees proclaim the doctrine of the RCC as fact during the school day and in a developed European country this is somehow seen as normal.

* these are horrible and abusive terms frequently used by RCC supporters in the recent past, and don't think for a moment that their thinking has changed, they just hide it better.

Flinty997

It seems you're intolerant of people who don't adhere to your religious standards. Kinda ironic.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119156179#Comment_119156179

You might clarify who you are whinging at, clearly not me as I'm not a member of any religion, but I ask for the benefit of all posters here 😀

Flinty997

When the results of the census comes out it will be all sorted.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119156191#Comment_119156191

You're obviously judging them against some arbitrary standard, a religious one that you've decided on.

And you're whinging about it. ironically..

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119156171#Comment_119156171

Yet that's the culture of sports that people support. See it on every sideline.

Hotblack Desiato

If people claim that they are members of a specific religion, and claim that 78% of their fellow citizens tick that box, shouldn't they be asked to justify why these claims are used to enforce the catholic religion in 89% of state funded primary schools?